Hafeez Ahmed v. Ashcroft

United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 6473

The Petitioner, Hafeez Ahmed, appeals from a decision denying him asylum based upon past persecution and fear of future persecution due to his family’s political affiliation.  The Immigration Judge (“IJ”) found that the Petitioner did not establish evidence of persecution and the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) affirmed.  The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit remanded, finding that the Petitioner did present credible evidence of political persecution. 

The Petitioner, a citizen of Pakistan, alleges that he was kidnapped, stabbed and beaten in 1992 because of his family’s affiliation to the People’s Pakistan Party (“PPP”).  The injuries he sustained hospitalized him for three weeks.  After being released, he did not leave Pakistan because the politically-motivated violence subsided when the PPP re-took power.  When the PPP’s power began to erode, the Petitioner fled to the U.S. for fear that the he would again suffer from politically-motivated abuse.

The IJ found that the Petitioner’s testimony was not credible because he did not leave Pakistan immediately after the kidnapping incident and that the abuse did not rise to the level of persecution because he was able to receive medical attention.  The Seventh District Court found that the IJ’s conclusions were not supported by substantial evidence.  It disagreed with the IJ’s determination because it felt that the Petitioner gave a credible explanation of why he did not attempt to leave immediately.  Furthermore, the fact that the Petitioner was hospitalized for three weeks demonstrates that the injuries were severe.

In remanding the case, the Court of Appeals stated that the burden of establishing past persecution had shifted and the Government assumes the burden of rebutting the presumption of future persecution based upon the past history of persecution.